Not prepared to give up Fourth Amendment rights

I regret that Max Boot feels like emulating a scared schoolgirl and hiding under the NSA’s “apron” — but I’m not prepared to yield my Fourth Amendment rights any more than gun advocates yield their Second Amendment ones. Why should I? Look, you’re just as dead whether it’s from a crazed gunman in a massacre or from terrorists. We all have to go some time, and I don’t see the Super Spy state doing squat about limiting the tens of thousands of gun deaths each year — many more than any terrorist attack could achieve.

As for Boot’s claim that The Washington Post and The Guardian are “compromising our national security,” no! Thanks to taking NSA’s bull by the horns, we now know how much we’ve lost as Americans. If Boot wants to give his civil liberties away so [national intelligence director] James Clapper can hold his hand, fine. Count me out!

Phil Stahl, Colorado Springs

This letter was published in the June 14 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

“Those who give up a little freedom in exchange for a little security, deserve and will get neither” — attributed to any one of several founders of this country, and spot on regardless of who write it.

Happy Jack

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.” Benjamin Franklin

Happy Jack

“Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.” Benjamin Franklin

Happy Jack

Sorry for the double post.

Dano2

I’m at a loss in imagining just what exactly the letter-writer is going to do to protect his rights. Unplug?

Best,

D

irisman

Exposing Clapper’s secret empire raises a major issue that has surfaced from time to time, but has never been properly addressed: how cost effective are some of these intelligence gathering programs, and whether some of them are simply a gravy train for private companies. We don’t know how much has been spent on data mining and how many lives have been saved. Does the program cost $1billion per life saved, $1 million. or some other amount. We could save a lot of lives with better food inspection. We also know that some programs really have to be classified, but it appears that secrecy can be used as a cover for very inefficient programs.

toohip

Well said. One of the real “insults” to all this is that we are farming our security protection of the lowest bidder to contractors. Snowden was a contractor for NSA, not a go’vt employee.

the scorekeeper

Do you mean like Bradley Manning?

peterpi

In the early 1990s, American satellites were so efficient at intercepting Russian communications, including cell phone data, that the NSA was overwhelmed, was buried under data. A truly significant phone call — “OK, General Kusnetsov, these new tanks are amazing! Invade France tomorrow! Raisa keeps complaining the croissants here are no good.” — could take weeks to locate, decipher, and be listened to.
Now we’re gathering even more data, ever more and more data. I wonder if we’re still being buried in data.
We know the cotton content of some guerrilla leader’s mistress’ nightgown, but we still don’t know what the leader’s intent is.
We know how much CO2 emissions are put out by China’s arr force, but we stillo don’t know their leader’s intentions.
With all our vaunted technology, the CIA and NSA still got surprised. Did either of them foresee the Arab Spring? Closer to home, did they forsee the Boston bombings?
Do they know whether Egypt really will attack Ethiopia over Ethiopia’s planned Blue Nile dam? Whether Iran would attack Israel with nukes?
Our vaunted machine snooping still can’t tell us a nation’s or a leader’s intentions.

peterpi

In the early 1990s, American satellites were so efficient at intercepting Russian communications, including cell phone data, that the NSA was overwhelmed with, was buried under, data. A truly significant phone call — “OK, General Kusnetsov, these new tanks are amazing! Invade France tomorrow! Raisa keeps complaining the croissants here in Moscow are no good.” — could take weeks to locate, decipher, and be listened to.
Now we’re gathering even more data, ever more and more data. Avalanches of data. I wonder if we’re still being buried in data.
We know the cotton content of some guerrilla leader’s mistress’ nightgown, but we still don’t know what the leader’s intent is.
We know how much CO2 emissions are put out by China’s air force, but we still don’t know their leader’s intentions.
With all our vaunted technology, the CIA and NSA still get surprised. Did either of them foresee the Arab Spring? Closer to home, did they foresee the Boston bombings?
Do they know whether Egypt really will attack Ethiopia over Ethiopia’s planned Blue Nile dam? Whether Iran would attack Israel with nukes?
They have the capability to track primafacie’s e-mail confirmation of a golf tee time, my online pizza order, thor’s church’s broadcast sermons. But, with a little foresight by the attackers, the CIA and NSA still wouldn’t have a clue about the next terrorist attack.
Our vaunted machine snooping still can’t tell us a nation’s or a leader’s intentions, and the machines don’t care whether an intercept is foreign or domestic..

holyreality

More Americans died from being shot by a four year old this year than from terrorist attacks.
America, land of the afraid, home of the secure.

the scorekeeper

There are two ways at looking at this. First is the way you did to minimize the perception of risk. The second is to look at what attacks we’ve thwarted to determine the effectiveness of what we are doing.

I remember a few years ago when there was a debate about how many people the USA had in prison. The people who thought that we were the land of the afraid would use the statistics that crime and specifically violent crime was dropping each year. To the other side, they saw a clear connection between having more violent offenders locked up with less violent crime.

holyreality

In other words, Bin Laden won.

Al

More kids died from being left unattended in a hot car this year then was shot by their parents.

Let’s outlaw parents driving their kids without government/nanny state oversight.

That should leave a leftest like you with a tingle up your leg.

holyreality

What? The land of the Free?

Whoever told you that is your Enemy!

toohip

This is a very confusing issue, especially for the times. I haven’t seen a lot of people jumping on the “traitor!” or “hero!” bandwagons quite yet. Many are caveating their arguments about Snowden, and what the NSA are doing. There are reasonable arguments that this is harmless that it’s just collecting “metadata” that is not so personal, often less what we provide a online service membership, prospective employer, or bank loan application. What we post on social media sites and emails and twitter are pretty personal, but not private. This metadata collection was credited with detecting and convicting Nahjibulla Zazi here in Denver. The questions of it is worth the risk, seem to be no reaching any majority.

I would agree, as most, that “some” form of harmless privacy data collection is needed in this age of home grown terrorism, but that universal data collection is pretty scary. But if profiling is illegal or politically incorrect, how does the NSA target the guy calling Yemin, vs your grandma calling you to wish you happy birthday? The next major attack, that gets compared to 9/11 with swing the pendulum the NSA’s way. But what event, predicted or feared, with swing it the other way?

Lots of questions and thoughts (Where’s Pyro when you need him!)

the scorekeeper

This particular issue is creating strange bedfellows. You have Michael Moore, Rush Limbaugh, and Senator Rand Paul agreeing on this issue while on the other side you have Lindsay Graham and Barbara Boxer in agreement contrary to the former group.

I see this breaking down this way, You have the principled libertarians who just think the government shouldn’t be doing this, period.

Then you have the rest of us. One group is uncomfortable that we have to do this, but trust the government as long as their party controls the government. When Bush was in office the Republicans were okay which the Democrats screamed what Bush was doing was illegal. Now with Obama you have the Democrats okay with it while the Republicans are doing the screaming.

Finally you have a group that doesn’t care who is in office as long as they keep the country safe.

holyreality

Personally, I’d rather have some $40K/year civil service bureaucrat in charge of data than some $200K/year lackey at a profitmongering corporation doing the same and selling it to advertisers.

Robtf777

Does anyone not find it odd that President Obama now embraces the idea of a “public debate” over something he always intended to hide from us?

Robtf777

Does anyone not find it odd that the Federal Government wants to go after Snowden for “outing” a “secret domestic spying operation on American citizens” in “general terms”……..while a Four-Star General basically gave a step-by-step example of how a terrorist was found…….and it was the Four-Star General who actually provided “more details” that “compromised” the “domestic spying operation on American citizens” than Snowden did?

Happy Jack

I find it odd that you made two responses and kept both under 100 words, Could this be proof of alien life forms taking over human bodies? Film at eleven.

Robtf777

Does anyone not find it odd that Obama decribed Operation Domestic Spying on American Citizens as being “legal”……..while Obama characterized the alledged Chinese Hacking Of American Computer Systems as being illegal……..and it turns out that the NSA, CIA, FBI or whoever was HACKING INTO CHINESE COMPUTER SYSTEMS…….in a way the Chinese would characterize as being “illegal”……so that it would appear that even Obama himself doesn’t know the meaning of the words “moral,” ethical,” and “legal”…..except that what applies to other people doesn’t apply to him – or this country.

Perhaps we should allow President Obama, the NSA, the FBI, and ALL LAw Enforcement Agencies to put cameras on ALL streets and roadways…….install “palm readers” on all entrances and exits to all buildings…..DNA everyone……take a full set of fingerprints from everyone……use the same “iris scan” and “voice recognition” systems various local jails use……so that The Government can use their Computers to go back and find out where everyone was on a given day and time……or who was at a specific location at a specific day and time……so that The Government can keep track of ALL its 300+ million people……so that the less than 1% who commit serious crimes can ALL be caught……and, if The Government chooses…..ALL traffic violators can be issued a summons.

If the issue is “peace and safety”……and “if you are not doing anything wrong”……then the same rules that apply to e-mals, internet searches, phone usage……should be simply expanded to apply to EVERYONE…..EVERYWHERE…..ALL THE TIME……24/7/366.

Of course, Justice Scalia, who gave a scathing dissent on the recent DNA-swab case that involved ARRESTED criminals, probably would have even more of a scathing dissent of the above thoughts…….but…..who cares, right?……as long as we trade “privacy” and “liberties” for the knowledge that The Government can keep us safe……from everything BUT “The Government” itself.

Guidelines: The Post welcomes letters up to 150 words on topics of general interest. Letters must include full name, home address, day and evening phone numbers, and may be edited for length, grammar and accuracy.